Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1988)72CTR(Cal)83
Dillon, LJ. :Group Lotus Car Cos plc and Lotus Cars Ltd. (the taxpayer companies) appeal against a decision of Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C (1987) 2 All ER 674), given on 18th December, 1986 whereby on a case stated at the request of the Crown under s. 56 of the Taxes Management Act, 1970 by the General Commissioners for the Wymondham division of Norfolk the Vice-Chancellor directed that the matter be remitted to the Special Commissioners for rehearing with liberty to each party to adduce fresh evidence.2. The issues debated in argument before the Vice-Chancellor and in this court have been essentially issues of procedure and onus of proof. What lies behind them, however, is the desire of the Crown to get in, if possible, certain fresh evidence which the Crown obtained for the first time after the commissioners had given their decision and which could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at the hearing before the commissioners.Since the only appeal to the High C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1987]66STC235(Cal)
Dipak Kumar Sen, J.1. At the instance of the parties this application was treated as an adjourned application in the list on the 26th March, 1987. It is recorded that the respondents do not admit the allegations in the petition as no affidavit was filed in opposition to the petition.2. At the instance of the parties the appeal was also treated on the day's list. By consent, filing of paper book was dispensed with and the undertaking given in that behalf is directed to stand discharged. The appeal was heard along with the application. The records and pleadings before the first court were produced and considered.3. The case of the appellant, Ram Lawat Shaw, is that he is a registered dealer within the meaning of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The sales tax assessments of the appellant have been completed by the commercial tax authorities up to the period of four quarters ending on the 1st March, 1982. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1988]174ITR572(Cal),[1988]41TAXMAN56(Cal)
DIPAK KUMAR SEN J. - In this application, the Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal-1, seeks a certificate from us that the judgment delivered by the court in Income-tax Reference No. 32 of 1977 dated May 6, 1985, involves a substantial question of law and is a fit case for appeal to the Supreme Court.It appears from the said judgment dated May 6, 1985, that this court followed its earlier decision in the case of the same assessee in CIT v. Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. : [1982]138ITR111(Cal) .It was submitted on behalf of the applicant that subsequent to the said decision, the Supreme Court has further laid down the law on the controversy in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT : [1981]132ITR559(SC) . The question involved in the present proceedings was whether the special appropriation for plant expansion and contingencies constituted reserves for the purpose of computing capital under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. It was submitted tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata
Reported in : (1987)21ITD478(Kol.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the department .against the order dated 16-10-1985 of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to the assessment year 1981-82 on the following ground : That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the original shares of Kesoram Cotton & Industries Ltd. should be valued with reference to the original cost to the appellant and not by averaging the cost of original shares with bonus.2. The assessee is a limited company deriving income from inter alia share dealings during the previous year under consideration which was the calendar year 1980. The assessee claimed that it had suffered a loss in its share dealings. It had purchased 19900 shares of Kesoram Cotton & Industries Ltd. at a cost of Rs. 8,32,230. During the previous year under consideration, it received 4950 bonus shares from the same company against its original holding of 19900 shares. The original 19900 shares ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : [1987]67STC199(Cal)
Suhas Chandra Sen, J.1. A large number of writ petitions have been moved by a number of banks challenging the notices issued by the Commercial Tax Officer, Central Section, Calcutta under Section 14(1) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 hereinafter described as the Act. Identical notices dated 13th December, 1985 were sent to a number of banks alleging that the banks were 'engaged in the business of letting out of movable property, viz., bank lockers on hire/lease/rentals to others for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration'. It was alleged that such transfer of right to use the bank locker amounted to 'sale' with effect from 1st April, 1984. The banks were called upon to produce documents and/or statements relating to receipts on account of rent of lockers of different branches of the banks in West Bengal from 1st April, 1984 for the purpose of levy of sales tax under the Act. The words 'taxes on the sale or purchase of the goods other than newspapers' can be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1988Cal370
Bimal Chandra Basak, J.1. Thisappeal is connected with two other appeals, one of which we have disposed of on 18th March, 1987 in F.M.A.T. No. 652 of 1980 Cachar Plywood Ltd. v. Corporation of Calcutta) and the other, today in K.M.A.T. 374 of 1479 (Corporation of Calcutta v. Cachar Plywood Ltd.).2. The facts would also appear from the judgment delivered on the 18th March, 1987. What has happened in this ease is that this writ petition was filed by the appellant herein praying that the writ petitioners are the owners of the premises No. 37/1/1, Khengraputty Street, now known as Purushottam Roy Street, Calcutta. This premises is on the north of the premises No. P/4, New Howrah Bridge Approach Road, known as Nandaram Market (hereinafter referred to as the said premises. The said premises are the subject matter of these three appeals. In the writ petition the petitioner prayed for :(a) A writ of and/or an order and/or direction in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding and directing th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1987)0CALLT99(HC),[1988]69STC135(Cal)
S.K. Mookherjee, J.1. Appeal No. F.H.A.T. No. 3716 of 1986 is directed against an order passed by a learned Single Judge on 17.9.86 in C.O. No. 9997(W) of 1986, dismissing a writ petition preferred by the appellants inter alia, on the ground that the writ petitioners have an alternative forum in the form of revision provided for under Bengal Finance Sales Tax Act. The instant application in connection with the said appeal for stay of operation of the judgment under appeal as also for some ad interim reliefs. The writ petitioners are the appellants/petitioners before us.2. The present appeal is one of the rare instances, as will be indicated by the facts and circumstances hereinafter, where a routine order even at the interlocutory stage, may not sub-serve the end of justice. The probable impact of even an interlocutory order on the survival of a business concern like that of the petitioners, on the one hand, and irreparable loss of revenue on the part of the statutory authorities on th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1987)0CALLT145(HC),91CWN1071
Chittatosh Mookerjee, C.J.1. Let C.R. No. 2057 of 1982 be heard separately.2. The petitioner as the plaintiff had instituted in the 6th Court of the learned Munsif at Alipore against the respective opposite parties as defendants, two suits, inter-alia, for their eviction from the premises described in the schedule of the respective plaint, of the said two suits. In paragraph 1 of the plaint of the each suit he claimed that he was a thika tenant and alleged that the defendants of the said two suits were monthly tenants under him. We need not at this stage set out the rest of the allegations as made in the plaint upon which the petitioner had, inter-alia, prayed for recovery of possession and also mesns profits. By the orders complained of, in these two revisional applications, the learned Munsif, 6th Court, Alipore, has ordered that the two suits would abate under Section 19 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981. In our view, the said orders are clearly er...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1988Cal64
G.N. Ray, J. 1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 5th December, 1986 passed by the learned trial Judge disposing of the writ petition moved by the respondent No. 1, Sri Kamalendu Ghosh against the Regional Manager, Regional Office, the National Small Industries Corporation Ltd and other respondents being respondents Nos. 2 to 5 in the instant appeal. 2. It appears that the writ petitioner respondent No. 1 Sri Karmalendu Ghosh moved a writ petition before this Court, inter alia, challenging the order of transfer passed by the Regional Manager, Regional Office of the National SmaNational Small Industries Corporation Ltd. transferring the writ petitioner to Cuttack by an order dated 25th November, 1986. The writ petitioner contended in the writ application that he was earlier transferred to Cuttack where he had served for more than three years and he became very ill there and made representations to come back to Calcutta.' The Executive Director (Development) strongly recomme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 1988(34)ELT13(Cal)
Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the refusal of the Customs Authorities to make redetermine the assessable value on the Bill of Entry in respect of 76 Coils of defective C.R.C.A. sheets which arrived in vessel S.S. Viswa Bandhen on the basis of the corrected freight shown by the Shipping Corporation of India. The facts are stated hereinafter.2. The said goods arrived sometime in November, 1986. Upon the arrival of the said goods the Customs Authorities allowed the petitioner to keep the said goods in the Warehouse under Section 59 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Shipping Corporation of India, the carriers of the said goods, issued a freight bill dated 29th October, 1986 in respect of the said goods for Rs. 4,75,350.03p to the petitioner. In view of the said freight bill raised by the Shipping Corporation of India, the petitioner at the time of filing the bill for Warehousing mentioned the freight paid in re...
Tag this Judgment!